3 Semester 1 Week 5

3.1 Summarising papers, writing, bullet point introductions

In this session, we cover summarising papers as well as general writing advice before specifically covering bullet point introductions. I then ask students to bring a bullet point introduction with them into the Semester 1 Week 7 session.

I’ve made some notes for this session. Feel free to use/adapt etc. as you wish. These notes are also included in each collapsible section below.

3.1.1 Expected progress

By now, I would be expecting to see some ethics drafts coming in and all projects should be firmed up. Rationales should all be submitted.

3.1.2 Summarising papers

I cover some suggestions that I have on how to summarise papers
- Summarise with intent (what is the purpose?)
- Pull out the key details (remember can go back for further detail)
- Take notes for the Discussion, even when reading for the Introduction

What I discuss with students: Summarising Papers

Reading and note-taking

Identify what the key points/findings/arguments are
Remember to avoid closely paraphrasing the original – when taking notes, try to think about how you would summarise it for someone who has never read the paper.

Judgement calls (weight and evaluation)

Try to avoid summarising every single detail, as then it can become too lengthy. Remember that you can refer back to the paper if you need to.
- Have a focus for the summary – what is your purpose?
- Help build a rationale?
- As background in the intro?
- Linking to theory?
- To link to findings in the Discussion?
Go beyond description and evaluate. What is great about the study? What is not-so-great? Why? What does this mean for how we interpret the study? How confident can we be with a study’s conclusions?
Some papers will be more relevant (and therefore will have a longer summary) than others. If a paper seems great in terms of topic, it’s not necessarily important to include in great detail if it’s methodologically weak.

Working across papers

Once you’ve summarised a few papers, take a step back and consider how they relate to each other.
Look at where they agree/disagree/build on each other. When you write your dissertation, then keep this in mind: you want to think of the ‘bigger picture’ and synthesise, rather than producing study 1 -> study 2 -> study 3 -> conclusion.

Reading while being aware of later sections

Even when reading papers in preparation for the introduction, keep an eye out for anything that might be useful for your Discussion.
I keep a document specifically for the Discussion and take notes from my reading as I go. I don’t use all of these at the end, but it means I have some thoughts written down and don’t have a blank space (which can be a bit overwhelming).

3.1.3 General writing advice

Writing advice will likely differ from supervisor to supervisor. Here are some of my suggestions:
- It’s better to write something than nothing
- Know what works for you (e.g. timing, accountability, blocking time out)
- Small goals can be helpful
- Split out generation and editing
  - This can help get over the hurdle of the ‘perfect’ sentence

What I discuss with students: Writing Advice

It’s better to write something/anything than nothing.
- Be accountable to others
- Body doubling can be useful
- Block out time in your calendar
Give yourself small goals, e.g. ten minutes of writing.
- It makes it easier to get started. If I was really struggling, I would write down what I was struggling with. Sometimes, just typing something was enough to get me into it, even if I’d spent the first five mins writing ‘I don’t have a clue what to write about’
If writing feels like the wrong tool that day, try talking it through instead – to a supervisor, a friend, or just to yourself. Saying it out loud can help you identify the structure of an argument faster than staring at a blank page
Know yourself (do you write better in the morning or at night?)
- I am better at creative things in the morning, so during my PhD I used to write every morning from 9-1, then the afternoon was spent doing things that didn’t need my brain as much. Within the schedule you have, think about what might work for you
Writing out of order
- You don’t have to write in the order it’ll be read in – if you’re stuck on the intro, try starting with a different section (e.g. Methods) that feels more concrete. Getting words down anywhere builds momentum to go back to the harder sections later
I used to get hung up on every single sentence. What helped me was splitting the process of generation and editing
- Generation - just focus on getting words on a page. Don’t worry about spelling, looking papers up, grammar, punctuation, structure etc. It’s about getting the ideas down.
- Editing - later (give yourself some time between this stage and the generation stage), focus on getting the things you wrote into a coherent draft.
- To do this, try to split it into two stages:
  - first, check the structure (does the argument hold together, is anything in the wrong place or missing),
  - then focus on the line-level parts (grammar, word choice, polishing sentences). This then means you only polish those parts that seem likely to ‘stick around’ and make it past the first round of editing.

3.1.4 Bullet point introductions

I discuss that I would like everyone to write a bullet point introduction for the next session. I tell students that I do not expect this to be perfect, and that it can change down the line
We go through some of the suggestions I have for writing this.
I ask students to post on the Teams channel before the next group meeting (in two weeks time) but others may choose a different process
I signpost them to Wil Toivo’s resource on developing a rationale for their introduction.

What I discuss with students: Bullet Point Introductions

Set the scene for the reader
Do the different paragraphs flow well?
A good structure starts off broad and ends narrow (i.e. closer to your study)
It can be helpful to use sub-headings, especially if you are covering literature from quite different areas
Try to synthesise literature (i.e. pull together literature from various sources, rather than concentrate on a study per paragraph)
Be selective about which literature makes the cut, not just how much detail each gets (i.e. not everything that is interesting needs to be in the intro)
Is there a theoretical basis for your research?
Identify the gap – what’s missing, unresolved, or contested in the literature – but remember to think about why it matters. “No one’s studied this” isn’t a justification on its own; ground the “why” in what’s already known or unresolved, not in what the findings might lead to (save future implications for the Discussion)
Try drafting your RQ/hypotheses first, even roughly – then check each bullet point is actually building towards it, rather than just being interesting background
End your introduction by presenting your RQ (qual) or your hypotheses (quant)